Suggesting the Supreme Court might reject the government's totalitarian interpretation of third party doctrine was absolutely unthinkable just a few short years ago. Yet here we are. We might win this one yet. #GetAWarrant
We're not likely to bury Smith v. Maryland and all its associated malignancies just yet, but make no mistake: winning in Riley and Carpenter would mark an astonishing change in judicial permissiveness toward even the most transparent abuses of surveillance authority.
And let's not forget the work put in here by Jones. It's starting to feel like the tide is turning for the first time in decades.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Edward Snowden

Edward Snowden Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @Snowden

12 Nov 19
The Chinese edition of my new book, #PermanentRecord, has just been censored. This violates the publishing agreement, so I'm going to resist it the way I know best: it's time to blow the whistle. You can help. Here's how: (THREAD)
I asked to see a copy of censored passages, and was given a list of a few of the worst examples. I'm going to post them right here on Twitter, and we're going to translate them and expose exactly what the censors were trying to hide. Let's use Twitter for something good.
Let us compile a correct and unabridged version of #PermanentRecord to publish freely online in Chinese, by assembling a cadre of translators to expose every shameful redaction the censors demanded. We will work in service to the greater Republic of Letters and a better internet.
Read 14 tweets
3 Oct 19
@AlecMuffett @jenvalentino @runasand @nytimes @gabrieldance @SteveBellovin Solid point. Much reporting on LE access demands (or "concerns") overlooks that the powers they have today are unprecedented and abnormal in a way our constitutional system does not anticipate. Status quo "should" be presumptively undesirable, yet editorial tone implies otherwise
@AlecMuffett @jenvalentino @runasand @nytimes @gabrieldance @SteveBellovin From a human rights perspective, a global reduction in mass surveillance capability is a desirable reversion to the mean. It is astonishing, and I would argue discrediting, for those claiming a public safety interest advocating for any new means of surveillance "at scale."
@AlecMuffett @jenvalentino @runasand @nytimes @gabrieldance @SteveBellovin Surveillance at scale is precisely the problem, because it is an expression of influence at scale. If you look at the problems we're dealing with in almost every country, they are variations on this theme.
Read 4 tweets
3 Oct 19
@jenvalentino @AlecMuffett @nytimes @gabrieldance While I do appreciate the reporting on this issue, not to mention your much longer history of work, which I have long followed with interest, but I have to agree with Alec that the editorial tone in this particular article is dangerously unskeptical. To cite a quick example:
@jenvalentino @AlecMuffett @nytimes @gabrieldance "It was unclear whether photos and videos of abuse were actually more prevalent on Facebook or were just being detected at a high rate." This is a rather breezy dismissal of what is the overwhelmingly clear explanation for the figures the pro-surveillance folks are citing here.
@jenvalentino @AlecMuffett @nytimes @gabrieldance The entirety of the trend that the surveillance folks are pushing here are quite clearly the product of increased sophistication in fingerprinting and flagging systems being adopted and operated by companies that are, at the same time, increasingly the center of the internet.
Read 4 tweets
30 Sep 19
If you read only one thing about my memoir, #PermanentRecord, make it the cover story in this month's New York Review of Books. It is an extraordinary piece. @nybooks nybooks.com/articles/2019/…
With Permanent Record suddenly considered among the year's best books, I again must thank the many who made it possible, from those mentioned in the text and acknowledgements to the countless hidden hands behind every timeless story.
I had set out merely to write a book, but when the manuscript was completed, it had become more—a work of literature. It took the better part of my year, drafting from night to noon, for that picture to come into focus. But at the outset, I was hardly an author.
Read 6 tweets
17 Sep 19
The government of the United States has just announced a lawsuit over my memoir, which was just released today worldwide. This is the book the government does not want you to read: (link corrected) amazon.com/Permanent-Reco…
Statement by the American Civil Liberties Union on the government's lawsuit against myself and the publishers: aclu.org/press-releases…
It is hard to think of a greater stamp of authenticity than the US government filing a lawsuit claiming your book is so truthful that it was literally against the law to write.
Read 23 tweets
24 Aug 19
@toholdaquill @NSAGov @Tails_live I wouldn't expect any system to be totally secure, much less remain secure forever in the face of adversary advances, but that's not the claim. Security is process of choosing between "less safe" and "more safe;" and continuing to fork toward safety until you reach "safe enough."
@toholdaquill @NSAGov @Tails_live Against a TLA, Tor (when used with particular care for what is being transmitted, and how, so as to limit the impact of bad exits and traffic analysis) was and is, in my opinion, far better protection than typical alternatives like static VPN tunnels.
@toholdaquill @NSAGov @Tails_live "Far better" doesn't imply "secure against TLA," it just means "more safe." "More safe," in isolation, often means "not safe enough," which is why we layer in protection for defense in depth. Even way back in prehistoric 2013, Tor was simply the outermost layer.
Read 9 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!